Heritage Action for Americahttps://heritageaction.com
Grassroots activists promoting conservative policies in Congress.Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:44:48 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3Want to talk to your Representative? Check this listhttps://heritageaction.com/2015/07/town-hall-list/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/town-hall-list/#commentsThu, 30 Jul 2015 14:00:23 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=23073Conservative accountability goes beyond casting a vote. Building a society in which freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and the civil society flourish requires a sustained effort. That is why we have compiled a non-exhaustive list of upcoming townhalls, all of which provide excellent opportunities to discuss important issues with members of Congress.

As always, make sure to confirm the details with the Representative or Senator’s office.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/town-hall-list/feed/6MEMO: How to Repeal All of Obamacare with Reconciliationhttps://heritageaction.com/2015/07/memo-how-to-repeal-all-of-obamacare-with-reconciliation/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/memo-how-to-repeal-all-of-obamacare-with-reconciliation/#commentsTue, 28 Jul 2015 16:29:58 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=24388To: Interested Parties
From: Heritage Action for America
Date: July 28, 2015
Subject: How to Repeal All of Obamacare with Reconciliation

Three years ago, Senate Republicans committed to using the budget reconciliation process to repeal Obamacare. As such, it is no surprise the Republican budget conference agreement “affirms the use of reconciliation for the sole purpose of repealing the President’s job-killing health care law.”

Today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Mike Lee issued a joint press release pledging to, as McConnell said, “continue our effort to use reconciliation — as the budget makes clear — to fulfill the promise we made to our constituents.” Earlier this month, McConnell sought to downplay expectations by saying the Senate would “consider using budget reconciliation for repealing as much of Obamacare as is reconcilable” but cautioned “there are certain rules that have to be applied to what is reconcilable.” His comments raised concerns — especially among conservative House members — that the Senate is procedurally unable to place a reconciliation bill that fully repeals Obamacare on the president’s desk.

TEA reduces the federal role in transportation once prior obligations of the HTF are met. The bill does not (and should not) propose a solution to past mismanagement and past commitments that were based on unrealistic projections of revenue and/or the assumption of a general fund bailout. Conservatives have proposed numerous offsets and reforms that would enable the HTF to be brought to solvency through spending reductions and devolution of responsibilities to the states.

Claim: TEA will require states to raise their gasoline taxes.

TEA gradually reduces the federal gas tax over a five-year period, while block-granting a portion of those revenues to states over that same time period. This is intended to allow states to transition to a funding structure that allows them the independence to manage their unique infrastructure requirements. Under the current HTF financing structure, one in four of the dollars states send to the federal government are diverted to non-highway spending. Eighteen percent of gasoline taxes go to the account dedicated to mass-transit within the Highway Trust Fund. Transit users do not pay anything into the Highway Trust Fund. There is more than enough funding at the current taxation levels to fund the maintenance of the national highway network—the issue is the wasteful federal diversions and mandates that increase project costs. State tax burdens will be much lower without federal mandates and wasteful spending absorbing billions of dollars in revenue. TEA returns the responsibility for raising revenue to the states, gradually phasing out federal gas taxes to a low, but sufficient level. States then have the flexibility to fund right-size transportation budgets how they see fit.

Claim: TEA will damage the national transportation network.

The federal highway system was finished in the early 1990s. Since then, the federal government has maintained and expanded its control over the funding process. Lawmakers have become attached to doling out transportation monies to favored causes, leading to a dilution of the user-pays concept that was established by paying for highway construction via gas taxes. Bob Poole of the Reason Foundation notes that, of the nearly $51 billion of HTF spending in 2013, only $24 billion was spent directly on roads and bridges. According to the GAO, of that amount, only $4.6 billion was spent on major highway and bridge projects (projects with a total cost of $500 million or more).

Keeping this in mind, TEA maintains a 3.7 cents per gallon federal gasoline tax and a 5.0 cents per gallon diesel tax to provide for the maintenance of other federal infrastructure still in place. Even under the current regime, states are already responsible for the lion’s share—three quarters—of transportation funding. Returning to them the lion’s share of autonomy would allow their flexibility and authority to be congruent with their funding responsibilities.

Claim: A federal role is required for interstate transportation connections.

The idea that, with a completed and maintained federal highway system in place under TEA, interstate transportation connections will suffer is implausible. States have long entered into agreements to connect their respective transportation networks, and have long held the understanding that mutual transportation cooperation between states is good for all involved. For instance, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut have joint responsibility for the infrastructure surrounding New York City. The reality is that in the event TEA is passed, added flexibility and lessened federal regulations will make these kinds of agreements even easier to produce, strengthening interstate transportation networks.

Claim: Federal transportation spending creates shovel-ready jobs.

While it has long been understood that federal spending in one area of the economy does not create jobs, but rather transfers funds from productive sectors to areas of political priority, some continue to believe in the connection between federal spending and employment. However, even for those who believe that federal spending is an engine of employment, spending in the infrastructure sector yields particularly poor results.

According to the Department of Labor, just over 300,000 Americans work in street, highway or bridge construction. Infrastructure construction requires relatively small amounts of highly skilled labor. For instance, according to the Heritage Foundation, as of 2013 there were only “13,500 unemployed cement masons, concrete finishers and terrazzo workers in the entire country.” Many construction employees require thousands of hours of training, training that can’t be rushed or acquired as the result of government spending.

The intermittent, gridlocked nature of Washington transportation legislation adds to the problem by causing labor demand fluctuations. Just during this past year, 15 states considered or implemented construction delays and cancellations because of the uncertainty surrounding federal legislation. Allowing states the authority to determine their own transportation will keep demand for construction employees more stable, leading to an inflow of workers into construction, and therefore an increase in jobs. The stability offered by avoiding Washington gridlock is a major virtue of TEA.

Claim: The Framers of the Constitution believed in a large federal role in transportation.

Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison, wrote:

Have you considered all the consequences of your proposition respecting post roads? I view it as a source of boundless patronage to the executive, jobbing to members of Congress & their friends, and a bottomless abyss of public money. You will begin by only appropriating the surplus of the post office revenues; but the other revenues will soon be called into their aid, and it will be a scene of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get most who are meanest.

Thomas Jefferson’s prescient assessment of the future of federal transportation belies any suggestion that infrastructure spending is somehow a constitutionally conservative position. In any case, the above quote is in reference to a much more limited system of national post roads. There is little chance that the Framers envisioned an overarching, long-term federal role in transportation. In keeping with the Framers vision for limited government, TEA continues the federal role in managing the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways as well as in transportation research and emergency assistance. However, the bill returns maximum discretionary authority and fiscal responsibility for state infrastructure back to those best positioned to identify and respond to the unique needs of individual communities.

Claim: A large federal role is essential for national security.

The Federal Aid Highway system was finished in the 1990s. The present system is more than sufficient to move troops and materiel throughout the country. The suggestion that American roads and bridges are crumbling, which is a predicate of the suggestion that without massive spending, the interstate highway system will fail to support American military maneuvers, is not supported by the evidence. According to the Heritage Foundation, the percentage of bridges that are structurally deficient has plunged since 1992. According to the Federal Reserve, “accelerated expenditures on improving road surfaces are unlikely to yield significant direct benefits…” TEA also continues to fund the Dwight D Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways.

Claim: TEA would damage mass transit.

According to the Heritage Foundation, transit spending is heavily concentrated in only six cities: Boston, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Chicago, and New York. The average American commute is 28 minutes long. The average transit commute is 45 minutes long. Only a small number of Americans actually use mass transit to get to work: just 5 percent of commuters use transit to travel to their jobs. The figure is only slightly higher—6 percent—for low-income Americans, over 80 percent of whom rely on cars for their commute.

Decades of diverting gas tax dollars into mass transit have not made it a viable mode of transportation outside of select few cities. TEA does not, however, constrain states from funding transit. Once the highway program is returned to the states, those authorities are free to design and create any surface transportation program they choose. If states have mass transit needs they are free to fund those projects themselves.

All claims about the explosion of transit alternatives are based on two faulty suggestions: one, that transit ridership is becoming a commonly-used mode, and second, that transit alleviates congestion. A cursory look at the statistics belies both. Transit uptake has not kept pace with population growth—not even close, and congestion is worse than ever. According to the Heritage Foundation, between 1980 and 2010, traffic congestion increased by 125 percent. 1980 also marked the inception of the mass transit account.

Claim: One of the diversions, the Transportation Alternatives Program, successfully supports growing modes of transportation.

The Transportation Alternatives Program provides funding for local projects from federal sources. A typical TAP funding target might be a bike path in Brownsville, Texas. Federal funding for state transportation projects is cumbersome enough. When the federal government is funding tiny, local projects, inefficiency and waste become even more severe. TAP enabled more than $800 million in money intended for federal highways to go to local museums, beautification, and bike paths. Under TEA, states will not receive federal money specifically for TAP purposes, but they are free to fund these programs under their own financing mechanisms.

Claim: States will get less money and have to pay more taxes under TEA.

Since 2008, the HTF has suffered from chronic revenue shortfalls. Each shortfall requires a general fund transfer. The uncertainty surrounding these periodic transfers significantly damages states’ ability to plan and fund long-term infrastructure projects—the same major projects that some use to justify a federal role. In addition to the core issue of funding uncertainty, there are a host of federal regulations which increase costs unnecessarily. According to the Heritage Foundation, “the Davis-Bacon Act requires [government entities] to pay construction wages that average 22 percent above market rates.” The National Environmental Policy Act requires the production of costly environmental impact statements at the beginning of every project. Governor Patrick McCrory, representing the National Governors Association, testified in front of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that one-third of North Carolina’s transportation funding was entangled in litigation relating to federal laws and regulations.

Claim: TEA will lead to a construction shutdown.

TEA is intended to devolve responsibility to the states only when the HTF’s prior obligations are met. In the event that this occurs, the devolution occurs over a five-year window, during which federal transportation funds are block-granted to the states. The resolution of prior contract obligation combined with the five-year timeline means that states and localities will have ample time and funds to prepare for taking responsibility for their own transportation needs.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/claim-and-fact-transportation-empowerment-act-tea/feed/0Memo: Export-Import Bank Amendment is Dawn of New Era in McConnell-run Senatehttps://heritageaction.com/2015/07/memo-export-import-bank-amendment-is-dawn-of-new-era-in-mcconnell-run-senate/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/memo-export-import-bank-amendment-is-dawn-of-new-era-in-mcconnell-run-senate/#commentsWed, 01 Jul 2015 15:08:58 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=24165“Looks to me like they have the votes, and I’m going to give them the opportunity.”

With those 16 words to the Associated Press about the future of the Export-Import Bank, Senator Mitch McConnell began charting a new course just six months into his tenure as majority leader. As Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn explained earlier this year regarding amendments and ending debate, “The only person who makes the decision is the leader.” To date, Majority Leader McConnell has not allowed a non-budget amendment to pass that he and a majority of his conference opposed.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/07/memo-export-import-bank-amendment-is-dawn-of-new-era-in-mcconnell-run-senate/feed/3Export-Import Bank Fact Sheethttps://heritageaction.com/2015/06/export-import-bank-fact-sheet/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/06/export-import-bank-fact-sheet/#commentsMon, 01 Jun 2015 18:35:20 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=23851The Export-Import Bank will expire on June 30th and the likelihood of ending this corporate welfare program is growing. There are currently 92 members of the House of Representatives publicly oppose to the Bank, every major Republican Presidential contender opposes the bank, and millions of Americans have joined the fight against it.

As Washington continues to play politics with the bank, here are 10 facts you should remember about the Export-Import Bank.

Top Ten Ex-Im Facts

Boeing, GE, and Caterpillar received 87% of Ex-Im loan guarantees in FY13.

The Ex-Im Bank provides export financing for just 0.009 percent of America’s small businesses.

The vast majority of exporters—98 percent—do not receive assistance from the Ex-Im Bank.

Heritage Action will be hosting a presidential candidate forum on September 18th in Greenville, South Carolina at the Bon Secours Wellness Arena in downtown Greenville. Featured guests include Heritage Action CEO Michael Needham, Former Senator Jim DeMint, and Governor Nikki Haley. We feel there is a need to restore conservative principles to the presidential debate. At this forum the candidates will engage in a dialogue with experts and voters on the policies embedded in our Opportunity for All, Favoritism to None agenda.

Opportunity for All, Favoritism to None is a comprehensive principled agenda that provides a policy roadmap to create opportunity, growth, civil society, limited government, national security and favoritism. You can learn more here.

Who? We will be inviting every viable Republican presidential candidate.

When? September 18th, 2015

Where? Bon Secours Wellness Arena in Greenville, South Carolina

All attendees must be registered. Space will be limited to those registered first before we take walk ins

Because the House appears poised to allow the Export-Import Bank to expire on June 30th without taking any action, proponents of reauthorizing the bank are staking their hopes on the Senate jamming the House. That path seems to be increasingly difficult to walk. While it is conventional wisdom to believe the Senate can “jam the House” the reality is that doing so is extremely difficult. There are two general scenarios in which Senate action could spur House action, but those situations are unlikely to materialize into significant threats.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/05/memo-path-to-ex-im-reauthorization-rapidly-closing/feed/0Mike Needham Cosigns Letter Supporting 5-Month Abortion Banhttps://heritageaction.com/2015/05/mike-needham-cosigns-letter-supporting-5-month-abortion-ban/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/05/mike-needham-cosigns-letter-supporting-5-month-abortion-ban/#commentsWed, 13 May 2015 18:33:27 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=23735Today the House will vote on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 36), introduced by Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ)88%. This legislation will protect unborn children by preventing abortions five months after fertilization, at which time scientific evidence suggests the child can feel pain. In 2013, a similar bill passed the House by a 228-196 vote, but did not receive consideration in the Senate.

Mike Needham joined with Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of Susan B. Anthony List, urging Congress to vote YES to H.R. 36.

This bill is a common-sense piece of legislation which protects unborn children after 20 weeks, or 5 months of pregnancy, based on their ability to feel excruciating pain. Previous uninformed notions that unborn and newborn babies could not feel pain, or misinformation on the ability of preterm infants to survive, are refuted by a growing body of scientific evidence. Our nation’s public policy should not reflect the tiring and uninformed politics of choice, but rather should catch up with the growing body of scientific evidence of pain and advancing perinatal medicine.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/05/mike-needham-cosigns-letter-supporting-5-month-abortion-ban/feed/0Action Alert: Our chance to make Iran recognize Israel statehoodhttps://heritageaction.com/2015/05/action-alert-our-chance-to-make-iran-recognize-israel-statehood/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/05/action-alert-our-chance-to-make-iran-recognize-israel-statehood/#commentsTue, 05 May 2015 13:47:17 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=23695The Obama administration is negotiating a deal with Iran on that nation’s nuclear program. Some conservative Senators believe Iran should be forced to recognize Israel’s right to exist before any deal can take effect.

However President Obama disagrees that Iran should recognize Israel as a state.

Senator Marco Rubio is pushing an amendment that would require the Obama administration to certify that Iran has publicly recognized Israel’s right to exist before America lifts sanctions on Iran.

Rubio’s amendment may be blocked – not allowed to come up for a vote.

Senate leaders will likely block this important amendment unless they feel the urgent and growing pressure from conservatives outside of Washington.

]]>https://heritageaction.com/2015/05/action-alert-our-chance-to-make-iran-recognize-israel-statehood/feed/1Urge the Senate to vote “NO” on the Corker-Cardin Iran billhttps://heritageaction.com/2015/04/urge-the-senate-to-vote-no-on-the-corker-cardin-iran-bill/
https://heritageaction.com/2015/04/urge-the-senate-to-vote-no-on-the-corker-cardin-iran-bill/#commentsTue, 28 Apr 2015 13:22:58 +0000http://heritageaction.com/?p=23644This week the Senate will take up the Corker-Cardin Iran bill or S. 615.

What is happening with Iran? The Obama Administration is in the final stages of negotiating a bad deal with Iran would allow the country to keep more than 6,000 operational centrifuges. Under this deal Iran wouldn’t even have to renounce terrorism or recognize Israel. It’s a bad deal for America and for the safety of the world.

What does the Corker-Cardin bill do? The Corker Cardin bill (S. 615) sets up a sham disapproval process on any presidential agreement with Iran. If passed, Congress would essentially be lowering the number of Senators needed to approve a bad international agreement from 67 to 34. This bill will not help stop President Obama’s Iran deal.